This is the same attitude that brought clown masses and liturgical dancers to the RCC.

That's hardly the case. It has been that criterion that has confirmed something's Orthodoxy. For example, when some people thought the New Calendar meant grace was lost, they saw the Holy Spirit come down at a New Calendar liturgy.

I'm glad you brought that up. It's true, the New Calendar did not deprive the Church of grace. Nevertheless, it's also obvious that the manner in which it was implemented was wrong and harmful. It were better that all Orthodox Churches had remained on the Old Calendar until they could carefully and in unity revise the calendar in due time.

It's not a question of the WR having grace- it does. I also don't doubt that, if an Orthodox priest celebrated the liturgy wearing a clown costume, the eucharist would still be valid. That's why I take issue with this attitude of, "It's valid, so what's the problem?" There are many things which, while not necessarily heretical or graceless, are not profitable.

I don't believe the Nikonian reforms enacted in 17th century Russia invalidated the liturgy, but nevertheless I think it's clear that it was unwise and harmful to the Church to impose them.

I can also compare the matter of rites to the matter of icons. There are many icons out there which are problematic, whether in their style or content. The frescoes in the Christ the Saviour Cathedral in Moscow come to mind. Nevertheless, I wouldn't think of not giving them their proper respect as icons. Some of these icons are even miracle-working.

Quote

There's no reason why, to be Orthodox, people have to follow the Costantinopolitan Rite. That's not how we did things for the first 1500 years of our history.

We didn't resurrect or compose rites on some ethnic or cultural basis either, or to suit someone's personal taste. And that's the problem with the modern WR. It is being enacted based on some ill-conceived ethnic/ cultural principle- "I am Western, therefore I should have a Western rite", or "I'm nostalgic for my little old Episcopalian church"- which would have been foreign to Sts. Leo, Gregory, Benedict, etc.

« Last Edit: October 22, 2010, 03:45:42 PM by Iconodule »

Logged

Mencius said, “Instruction makes use of many techniques. When I do not deign to instruct someone, that too is a form of instruction.”

Except (as has already been noted about a million times) no one is desiring a Western Rite because they think they deserve it, or they think it's better, or any other fantasy motive you have the clairvoyance to know about all Western Rite parishioners.

We simply believe in the power of Orthodoxy to redeem.

Where you see things as "lost" and "dead," we see the power of Christ in His Church to find and bring back to life.

Where we see the Prodigal Son returning to his blessed Home, being embraced by his Father in celebration, you block the door and demand he become like his brother if he wants to be let in.

But all of that is beside the point. It is extremely evident that your contentions are based upon your own lack of understanding, and there's not much anyone can do about that. You can choose to mock and ridicule the fruits of Ss. John Maximovitch, Tikhon, Raphael, and Nicholas, but we're going to offer our prayers of thanksgiving to them and the countless others who believe in the power of Orthodoxy to redeem anything and everything.

The Belgian monastery under Abbot Thomas, Notre-Dame-Consolatrice-des-Affligés in Pervijze, used the Lorrha Missal for a brief period. Then permission was withdrawn by Moscow; I am told it was because of complaints from other Orthodox.

The Belgian monastery under Abbot Thomas, Notre-Dame-Consolatrice-des-Affligés in Pervijze, used the Lorrha Missal for a brief period. Then permission was withdrawn by Moscow; I am told it was because of complaints from other Orthodox.

Father,

Do you mean other Orthodox jurisdictions, other Orthodox monasteries, or Orthodox laity elsewhere?

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen

The Belgian monastery under Abbot Thomas, Notre-Dame-Consolatrice-des-Affligés in Pervijze, used the Lorrha Missal for a brief period. Then permission was withdrawn by Moscow; I am told it was because of complaints from other Orthodox.

Do you have more specific info about this? I'm curious what the exact complaints were?

Sleeper, I wasn't trying to be rude in going into detail about being a husband or father but I really have noticed that the more time I spend online, hours perhaps, the less free time I have to spend with my wife and son which I think we can agree is more important.I added the book because I think it is an excellent example of liturgical criticism and research. The great detail and effort to show exactly what is wrong with the Novus Ordo Mass and how it expresses a theology directly at odds with the Traditional Theology of the Catholic, even the doctrines one must believe in to be a Catholic! I also posted a link to this book because Azurestone mentioned the Novus Ordo Mass as being better, more universal, and, somehow, more Traditional, - Traditional Novus Ordo Mass seems like an oxymoron - than the Tridentine Latin Mass. I wanted to ask because I never really found out for sure: In the Western Rite parishes is it common for people to venerate, bow down before and kiss, icons? I think I should balance my previous criticism with some positive statments about the WRO in the AOA. They are, for the most part in my experience, devout, pious, and dedicated Christians who are serious about Orthodoxy. In spite of my criticism and as you might be able to tell from what I've mentioned, I frequently attended the Tridentine Latin Mass before I became Orthodox and have a great love and at times nostalgia for the neo-baroque and Gothic-revival interiors of the churches I attended. It is in spite of such nostalgia, sentiment and sympathy that I make my arguments. What I really worry about when corresponding with and from looking at websites and blogs of some Western Rite Orthodox is their fondness for saints who came after the Roman Patriarchate, Western Europe, fell into heresy. I think that reading Bernard of Clairvaux, Aquinas & Bonaventura can be good and even Orthodox reading but we still have to recognize that neither were ever members of the One True Church during their lifetime nor did they seek Orthodoxy but instead sought to see the Latin heresy triumph over the Orthodox Church. I have a strong admiration and even veneration for King Charles I of England. At the University I attended I wrote a forty page essay/presentation to demonstrate that modern history does not adequately teach the truth about him and his martyrdom. He was a man who died defending the legitimate rights of the God-Anointed Sovereign to rule absolutely after a show trial of the rump parliament composed of Satanic-Bloodthirsty Republican Revolutionaries and Puritans under the wicked Cromwell. But as much as I revere Charles I he was not Orthodox and steadfast in his Laudian/Arminianist High Church Anglican confession.I just worry about people distorting the Truth of Our Faith because of their personal sentiments for whom they see as saintly people and then placing their pride in their individual beliefs and ideas above that of the judgment of the True Church guided by God Himself! Such Pride is Satanic as that is the same way that he fell from Heaven, through Pride!But those in the Western Rite who are devoted to Orthodoxy are good people and those I've met over the past years have been and remain good friends!

I added the book because I think it is an excellent example of liturgical criticism and research. The great detail and effort to show exactly what is wrong with the Novus Ordo Mass and how it expresses a theology directly at odds with the Traditional Theology of the Catholic, even the doctrines one must believe in to be a Catholic! I also posted a link to this book because Azurestone mentioned the Novus Ordo Mass as being better, more universal, and, somehow, more Traditional, - Traditional Novus Ordo Mass seems like an oxymoron - than the Tridentine Latin Mass.

I never said the Novus Ordo Saeclorum Mass was better. I said it has been recognized as lacking in substance and is being improved with a new translation. This new translation is more of a transliteration of the Latin Mass to avoid watering down the theology of the Mass. Therefore, done appropriately, it should be a Latin Mass said in English. So yes, a traditional NO.

Sleeper, I wasn't trying to be rude in going into detail about being a husband or father but I really have noticed that the more time I spend online, hours perhaps, the less free time I have to spend with my wife and son which I think we can agree is more important.

Indeed! I didn't take that as being rude and I completely understand. You brought up a lot of points to address and I didn't want to take the time and care to give replies if they weren't going to be read, you know?

Quote

I wanted to ask because I never really found out for sure: In the Western Rite parishes is it common for people to venerate, bow down before and kiss, icons?

Absolutely! Typically with an icon we'll simply cross ourselves and kiss. We'll do the traditional thrice-bow when venerating relics.

Quote

I think I should balance my previous criticism with some positive statments about the WRO in the AOA. They are, for the most part in my experience, devout, pious, and dedicated Christians who are serious about Orthodoxy. In spite of my criticism and as you might be able to tell from what I've mentioned, I frequently attended the Tridentine Latin Mass before I became Orthodox and have a great love and at times nostalgia for the neo-baroque and Gothic-revival interiors of the churches I attended. It is in spite of such nostalgia, sentiment and sympathy that I make my arguments. What I really worry about when corresponding with and from looking at websites and blogs of some Western Rite Orthodox is their fondness for saints who came after the Roman Patriarchate, Western Europe, fell into heresy. I think that reading Bernard of Clairvaux, Aquinas & Bonaventura can be good and even Orthodox reading but we still have to recognize that neither were ever members of the One True Church during their lifetime nor did they seek Orthodoxy but instead sought to see the Latin heresy triumph over the Orthodox Church. I have a strong admiration and even veneration for King Charles I of England. At the University I attended I wrote a forty page essay/presentation to demonstrate that modern history does not adequately teach the truth about him and his martyrdom. He was a man who died defending the legitimate rights of the God-Anointed Sovereign to rule absolutely after a show trial of the rump parliament composed of Satanic-Bloodthirsty Republican Revolutionaries and Puritans under the wicked Cromwell. But as much as I revere Charles I he was not Orthodox and steadfast in his Laudian/Arminianist High Church Anglican confession.I just worry about people distorting the Truth of Our Faith because of their personal sentiments for whom they see as saintly people and then placing their pride in their individual beliefs and ideas above that of the judgment of the True Church guided by God Himself! Such Pride is Satanic as that is the same way that he fell from Heaven, through Pride!But those in the Western Rite who are devoted to Orthodoxy are good people and those I've met over the past years have been and remain good friends!

I appreciate the positive remarks! And please, rest assured, that I share your sentiments! Conversion, true conversion is of UTMOST importance! We should not be venerating post-Schism believers who were outside of canonical Orthodoxy, and I've yet to meet a WR parishioner who does or is even tempted to do so. Although, interestingly enough, Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon is known to honor St. Bonaventure before he begins the Divine Liturgy, and he is Eastern Rite. His words, "If St. Bonaventure isn't a saint, then I don't know who is."

And the Western Rite was not founded because of nostalgia or pride or any other, darker motive. Truly, it is out of a desire to honor the Orthodoxy of the West and to once again bring that tradition, mindset, culture, and heritage into canonical Orthodoxy, where it belongs. It is out of recognition that Orthodoxy has the power and the obligation to assume and bless all that is true and beautiful. It is not because we find the Eastern Rite too foreign (although that has certainly been a roadblock for some), it is not because we don't think the Eastern Rite is "good enough" (it most certainly is); rather, it is a calling to join Christ in His mission to redeem and sum up everything in Himself. We don't think the Western Rites of the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church should be "lost" and we do not think they should be thought of as "dead." They need to be restored if for nothing else than the fact that they rightfully belong to Orthodoxy and they give glory to God.

You might not agree with how the Western Rite is being carried out, but you must understand that it is a new endeavor and those involved have regular meetings to discuss what we're doing right and what we're doing wrong. It's a process. And it deserves the prayers and encouragement of our fellow Orthodox brothers and sisters.

Personally I would also like us to use the original Ecclesiastical Latin these rites were celebrated in as well.

I'm all for "liturgical archeology" and using pre-Schism liturgies of Old Rome but why an Earth use non-vernacular language. I could understand using some ancient form of vernacular as is case in several local churches but why to use Latin.

Sorry, for not addressing this question.This gets to an issue that I'm surprised is not more hotly debated in the U.S. In the Orthodox countries it is debated topic with sometimes fierce arguments. The vernacular is whatever the language of the people of a nation is at period in time. The vernacular changes with each generation until after a few generations the difference is obvious. Whether we use Thou or You?! is an issue I see debated now and again. Ecclesiastical languages can be means conform ourselves more to the Church and can also be unifying, such as Church Slavonic for the different Slavic nations. I could go on an list arguments and debate them but to be most honest I am nostalgic for the Latin I used to hear when attending Latin Mass before becoming Orthodox. Learning the prayers in an ecclesiastical language, such as I did years ago with Latin and now am doing with Church Slavonic, it takes effort, care and even thoughtful consideration. The ecclesiastical language is set apart as something which is not in itself holy but has been dedicated to the Lord as a means for separating ourselves from the world, from our common language, and through the effort of learning the language, making a sacrifice for the Lord to draw closer to Him showing the desire conform ourselves more to a sacred mode of living. But I admit that this is not the best of arguments and I have to admit that prayers to the Lord in any language when said in contrition and heart-felt love and devotion are just as good as what we say in an ecclesiastical language. I think I just like ecclesiastical languages based on personal experience.When I used to hear hymns in Latin, the Te Deum, and now when I hear hymns in Church Slavonic, Dostoinno yEst, I tend to feel as if the ecclesiastical language is helping to separate me from the world and even lifts my mind and heart to the heavenly. I think this is especially because ecclesiastical languages, when they become that, are only heard in relation to prayers, to worship and so we naturally associate the language itself with the Holy and with worship. I hope that was a better reply than just saying we should use Ecclesiastical Latin because I like the way it sounds.

"A man inherited a field in which was an accumulation of old stone, part of an older hall. Of the old stone some had already been used in building the house in which he actually lived, not far from the old house of his fathers. Of the rest he took some and built a tower. But his friends coming perceived at once (without troubling to climb the steps) that these stones had formerly belonged to a more ancient building. So they pushed the tower over, with no little labour, in order to look for hidden carvings and inscriptions, or to discover whence the man's distant forefathers had obtained their bulding material. Some suspecting a deposit of coal under the soil began to dig for it, and forgot even the stones. They all said: 'This tower is most interesting.' But they also said (after pushing it over): 'What a muddle it is in!' And even the man's descendants, who might have been expected to consider what he had been about, were heard to murmur: 'He is such an odd fellow! Imagine his using these old stones just to build a nonsensical tower! Why did not he restore the old house? He had no sense of proportion.' But from the top of that tower the man had been able to look out upon the sea." - J.R.R. Tolkien, Beowulf: the Monsters and the Critics (1936)

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

Except (as has already been noted about a million times) no one is desiring a Western Rite because they think they deserve it, or they think it's better, or any other fantasy motive you have the clairvoyance to know about all Western Rite parishioners.

We simply believe in the power of Orthodoxy to redeem.

Where you see things as "lost" and "dead," we see the power of Christ in His Church to find and bring back to life.

Where we see the Prodigal Son returning to his blessed Home, being embraced by his Father in celebration, you block the door and demand he become like his brother if he wants to be let in.

But all of that is beside the point. It is extremely evident that your contentions are based upon your own lack of understanding, and there's not much anyone can do about that. You can choose to mock and ridicule the fruits of Ss. John Maximovitch, Tikhon, Raphael, and Nicholas, but we're going to offer our prayers of thanksgiving to them and the countless others who believe in the power of Orthodoxy to redeem anything and everything.

Very good point. Just as the dead bones were given flesh in the Old Testament, and just as our Lord raise Lazarus who was four days dead, so can the Holy Spirit bring to life the Liturgies of those that worshiped God in Truth in years past. To deny this denies that those people still live. While I am a die hard believer in the Byzantine Rite, particularly the Slavic version, I have no doubt in my mind that when an Orthodox Priest celebrates an ancient Western Liturgy, there is a cloud of Saints surrounding him that also worshiped God in that way during their Earthly life. This is all the continuity that is needed.

Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

"Since the Body of Christ is One on earth and in heaven, the fullness, or entirety, of the Church is always present in it. Thus the unity of the Church includes the one teaching, committed by Christ to the holy Apostles in its entirety, without changes or additions; the unity of the faith and the communion of the Holy Spirit.

The Church always abides in its fullness; all Orthodox Christians throughout the world and throughout time, are together with us, when we communicate and when we are at prayer in the Church: all the Saints, all our ancestors, all those close to us, regardless of where they are: in this life, or in heavenly abodes.

In this fullness, there abides not only the Church of Russia, but all the Local Orthodox Churches of all lands and all Orthodox peoples.For this reason, there are no “closed” or “destroyed” churches, no “abolished” monasteries, because the Lord God, in whom their departed members abide as part of His Church, is outside of time, and they are eternally with Him.

One should therefore not suppose that any part of the Church has ceased to exist. For example, the Armenian Church of St. Gregory the Enlightener will always exist in heaven, no matter what the state of the Armenian Church on earth may be.

The earthly Roman Church separated from Orthodoxy; but the heavenly, Orthodox Church of Rome will always exist, and St Gregory the Dialogist and the other Orthodox Western Saints are ever with us.

The earthly Armenian Church, and the Roman, fell away from the unity of Orthodoxy, and are deprived of communion with us: but the Armenian and Roman Saints, being in the Kingdom of God in heaven, eternally present that spiritual foundation upon which those Churches can be restored.

This truth was seen with exceptional spiritual clarity by St John Maximovitch, who restored Western Orthodoxy: he remains invisibly present with us, and his mission lives.

In other words, to be Orthodox means to be in union with the whole Orthodox Church, and to accept all of its heritage."

This is the exact thinking that makes me suspicious of the Western rite. Why shouldn't I start clamouring for my own Chinese-American rite?

Fr. David Abramtsov puts it well, "Unless a truly indigenous African Liturgy can be foreseen, a truly indigenous Indian and Chinese Liturgy, composed according to the one unique structure of the Liturgy (a structure imposed interiorly, having its source in dogmatic and mystical theology—in the true sense of those words—and not exteriorly by stifling the life of other Liturgies, as was the case historically speaking, where St. John Chrysostom’s Liturgy is concerned), the truly Orthodox vision of the world has not yet been seen. Uniformity, imposition, external authority are the death of Orthodoxy, for she is a precious box encrusted with a thousand different (but equally lovely) jewels, each of which reflects the light of truth in a manner particular and unique."

This is what Orthodoxy does, it infiltrates a culture. Surely you realize that "Eastern" Orthodoxy and the rites used by the "Eastern" Orthodox churches are what this is? They are the rites and customs that were brought to fruition as the Faith took root in the Eastern cultures.

Guided by the Holy Spirit? Sure. But we need to realize that rites are not "top down" entities that were crafted by God and delivered to us. They are, rather, "bottom up" entities, produced by the people of a culture as they incarnate the Faith.

We are not creating rites out of thin air. Rites are an organic development, and the fact that the Eastern Rites and the Western Rites were so different shows that culture is one of the defining aspects of creating these expressions. Why is it suspicious that those of us in the West, who are products of Western culture, want to worship according to the rites that our culture produced? Rites, mind you, that were guided by the Holy Spirit, just as in the East. Rites that produced countless saints now interceding for us. What could possibly be suspect about that?

Organic rites develop over time, shared experience, through the Holy Spirit filling the lives of bishops, priests and people, from which saints come. This was the organic life of the Western Church prior to the Schism. Post schism what is the story? The slide of the Western Church into absolute heresy, from which came the Reformation. No western Orthodox saints for more than a thousand years. The air is not only state, it is fetid in western Christian culture.

The revival of the western-rite is being done - in the main by sincere people for sincere motives. In Tasmania scientists want to try and create a Tasmanian tiger using preserved DNA. This is what I think tweaking so-called Sarum Anglican masses is like - trying to bring back a rite that has been dead and buried for too long.

The Byzantine rite is full of happy western priests and laity, a few bishops and many monastics. Christianity is now counter-cultural in our post-modern secular world. The resonance of the western-rite is for a few liturgical traditionalists of the Anglican or perhaps Latin persuasion, but it does not resonate with many lay people. That thousands of laity are now (Byzantine) rite Orthodox Christians tells me more than anything.

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvationS John of Shanghai & San Francisco

Organic rites develop over time, shared experience, through the Holy Spirit filling the lives of bishops, priests and people, from which saints come. This was the organic life of the Western Church prior to the Schism. Post schism what is the story? The slide of the Western Church into absolute heresy, from which came the Reformation. No western Orthodox saints for more than a thousand years. The air is not only state, it is fetid in western Christian culture.

The revival of the western-rite is being done - in the main by sincere people for sincere motives. In Tasmania scientists want to try and create a Tasmanian tiger using preserved DNA. This is what I think tweaking so-called Sarum Anglican masses is like - trying to bring back a rite that has been dead and buried for too long.

The Byzantine rite is full of happy western priests and laity, a few bishops and many monastics. Christianity is now counter-cultural in our post-modern secular world. The resonance of the western-rite is for a few liturgical traditionalists of the Anglican or perhaps Latin persuasion, but it does not resonate with many lay people. That thousands of laity are now (Byzantine) rite Orthodox Christians tells me more than anything.

It helps to remember our Lord speaking of the tree; and that branches could be pruned, and also *grafted back on*. This is what the Western rite is - a regrafting on. You might remember the Prophet Ezekiel, and the Valley of Dry Bones? "“Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the LORD! This is what the Sovereign LORD says to these bones: I will make breath enter you, and you will come to life. I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the LORD.’” How is that for DNA!

The resonance of the Western rite is for Classical Wesleyan Pentecostals like my wife and I in our upbringing. Not always liturgical traditionalists - many Old Catholics, Anglicans - Anglo-Catholic *and* Evangelical, Roman Catholics (as we've seen great response there), as it has been in the past. Lutherans have responded, Methodists, and even those who were not religious, or came from other religions. Thousands of laity are now Western rite Orthodox. Many converts have come to the Byzantine rite, and then fell away - for so many reasons. So, the rite is no guarantee: it hasn't stopped attrition of 2nd, 3rd, and latter generation 'cradle' Orthodox in the West - or even in the Old Countries. It didn't stop the development of Eastern Catholicism or Byzantine rite Lutheranism. The dogma is the drama - not the rite.

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

Is it thousands? The Antiochian Church has 26 parishes in the United States and the Russian Church Abroad has none. (Over the last month 10 parishes under Archbishop Anthony Bondi have been received - how many laymen do they number apiece?)

Quote

. So, the rite is no guarantee: it hasn't stopped attrition......[/szie]

The Western Rite guarantees attrition. Rites create a close affinity between the people who use them. We see this so strongly with the Eastern Rite Catholics who have found and still find it so easy to return to Orthodoxy in whose Rites they worship. Rite calls to Rite.

We see it also in the ease with which converts to the Western Rite slip back to their Catholic and Anglican Churches and their former familiar milieu.

Funny math. We see less Western rite converts 'slipping back' than Eastern rite converts.

As for 'rite calls to rite' - not really, as the Orthodox Western rite is not what they use in the Anglican or Roman Catholic churches. There are theological differences, differences in the prayers that is simply not the case in the split between Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics. Its easier to slip 'in and out' of the Eastern rite of Orthodoxy for Western rite Orthodox.

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

This is especially true here in the US, where most of the Greeks and Lebanese Orthodox in lower Alabama and the Florida Panhandle have become Methodist, Baptist, Episcopalian, and Roman Catholic. And they did not need Eastern rite to do it. One even finds some who will attend the Greek Orthodox while attending the others as well. Most of the Russians (recent immigrants) either don't bother with church, or are happy to attend Roman Catholic services while making a visit to the Greek church on Pascha.

Just a reality check...

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

A reality check would be if you would be able to document your claim that there are thousands of WR Orthodox. Since there are basically only the 26 Antiochian parishes in the States, it ought not to be a difficult thing to do.

Father Aidan mentioned that his Austin parish under the Milan Synod had 50 congregants and that this was an exceptional number.

One is forgetting the ROCOR congregations in the US, Canada, UK, Australia, Philippines and elsewhere. They do exist, and are increasing - though some of us don't worry about numbers. We were averaging about a dozen with our congregation here: and that in a very small town. We've never dropped below half of that.

..and I should say: we're the smallest.

« Last Edit: November 30, 2010, 09:47:45 AM by Aristibule »

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

This is especially true here in the US, where most of the Greeks and Lebanese Orthodox in lower Alabama and the Florida Panhandle have become Methodist, Baptist, Episcopalian, and Roman Catholic. And they did not need Eastern rite to do it. One even finds some who will attend the Greek Orthodox while attending the others as well. Most of the Russians (recent immigrants) either don't bother with church, or are happy to attend Roman Catholic services while making a visit to the Greek church on Pascha.

Just a reality check...

I am not sure what your point is. It wasn't just in the South. In Binghamton, NY for example, most of the Lebanese and/or Arab Orthodox or Greek Catholics did become "Methodist, Baptist, Episcopalian, and Roman Catholic." This despite the fact that there were both Orthodox or Greek Catholic churches in the area dating back to 1904 for the Greek Catholics and 1915 for the Orthodox and the records of these communities record numerous baptisms of Middle Eastern origin babies.

This is the exact thinking that makes me suspicious of the Western rite. Why shouldn't I start clamouring for my own Chinese-American rite?

Fr. David Abramtsov puts it well, "Unless a truly indigenous African Liturgy can be foreseen, a truly indigenous Indian and Chinese Liturgy, composed according to the one unique structure of the Liturgy (a structure imposed interiorly, having its source in dogmatic and mystical theology—in the true sense of those words—and not exteriorly by stifling the life of other Liturgies, as was the case historically speaking, where St. John Chrysostom’s Liturgy is concerned), the truly Orthodox vision of the world has not yet been seen. Uniformity, imposition, external authority are the death of Orthodoxy, for she is a precious box encrusted with a thousand different (but equally lovely) jewels, each of which reflects the light of truth in a manner particular and unique."

This is what Orthodoxy does, it infiltrates a culture. Surely you realize that "Eastern" Orthodoxy and the rites used by the "Eastern" Orthodox churches are what this is? They are the rites and customs that were brought to fruition as the Faith took root in the Eastern cultures.

Guided by the Holy Spirit? Sure. But we need to realize that rites are not "top down" entities that were crafted by God and delivered to us. They are, rather, "bottom up" entities, produced by the people of a culture as they incarnate the Faith.

We are not creating rites out of thin air. Rites are an organic development, and the fact that the Eastern Rites and the Western Rites were so different shows that culture is one of the defining aspects of creating these expressions. Why is it suspicious that those of us in the West, who are products of Western culture, want to worship according to the rites that our culture produced? Rites, mind you, that were guided by the Holy Spirit, just as in the East. Rites that produced countless saints now interceding for us. What could possibly be suspect about that?

Organic rites develop over time, shared experience, through the Holy Spirit filling the lives of bishops, priests and people, from which saints come. This was the organic life of the Western Church prior to the Schism. Post schism what is the story? The slide of the Western Church into absolute heresy, from which came the Reformation. No western Orthodox saints for more than a thousand years. The air is not only state, it is fetid in western Christian culture.

The revival of the western-rite is being done - in the main by sincere people for sincere motives. In Tasmania scientists want to try and create a Tasmanian tiger using preserved DNA. This is what I think tweaking so-called Sarum Anglican masses is like - trying to bring back a rite that has been dead and buried for too long.

The Byzantine rite is full of happy western priests and laity, a few bishops and many monastics. Christianity is now counter-cultural in our post-modern secular world. The resonance of the western-rite is for a few liturgical traditionalists of the Anglican or perhaps Latin persuasion, but it does not resonate with many lay people. That thousands of laity are now (Byzantine) rite Orthodox Christians tells me more than anything.

An echo of what you want to hear?

I know plenty of Orthodox who would have gone WRO if it were presented to them, others who have stated they will go WRO if it becomes available, and those who have done so (one family used to go to a Eastern rite church with Da Vinci's Last Supper, an organ, etc. until they decided they saw no purpose in being Western wanna be when they could be authentically Western). And I have met those who were cradle EO who went WRO. Better that than Episcopalian, the Vatican's Latin rite, Methodism, etc.

I submit that if the WRO was as nonviable as is made out by some, its detractors wouldn't feel the reflexive need to douse any enthusiasm to it, lest it catch fire.

Btw, you keep speaking about a lack of saints in the West the last thousand years, as if the West hasn't had its practitioners of virtue. That is far from the Truth, along with the idea that the East has been a vice free zone.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Organic rites develop over time, shared experience, through the Holy Spirit filling the lives of bishops, priests and people, from which saints come. This was the organic life of the Western Church prior to the Schism. Post schism what is the story? The slide of the Western Church into absolute heresy, from which came the Reformation. No western Orthodox saints for more than a thousand years. The air is not only state, it is fetid in western Christian culture.

The revival of the western-rite is being done - in the main by sincere people for sincere motives. In Tasmania scientists want to try and create a Tasmanian tiger using preserved DNA. This is what I think tweaking so-called Sarum Anglican masses is like - trying to bring back a rite that has been dead and buried for too long.

The Byzantine rite is full of happy western priests and laity, a few bishops and many monastics. Christianity is now counter-cultural in our post-modern secular world. The resonance of the western-rite is for a few liturgical traditionalists of the Anglican or perhaps Latin persuasion, but it does not resonate with many lay people. That thousands of laity are now (Byzantine) rite Orthodox Christians tells me more than anything.

An echo of what you want to hear?

I know plenty of Orthodox who would have gone WRO if it were presented to them, others who have stated they will go WRO if it becomes available, and those who have done so (one family used to go to a Eastern rite church with Da Vinci's Last Supper, an organ, etc. until they decided they saw no purpose in being Western wanna be when they could be authentically Western). And I have met those who were cradle EO who went WRO. Better that than Episcopalian, the Vatican's Latin rite, Methodism, etc.

I submit that if the WRO was as nonviable as is made out by some, its detractors wouldn't feel the reflexive need to douse any enthusiasm to it, lest it catch fire.

Btw, you keep speaking about a lack of saints in the West the last thousand years, as if the West hasn't had its practitioners of virtue. That is far from the Truth, along with the idea that the East has been a vice free zone.

I know plenty of Orthodox who would have gone WRO if it were presented to them, others who have stated they will go WRO if it becomes available, and those who have done so (one family used to go to a Eastern rite church with Da Vinci's Last Supper, an organ, etc. until they decided they saw no purpose in being Western wanna be when they could be authentically Western). And I have met those who were cradle EO who went WRO. Better that than Episcopalian, the Vatican's Latin rite, Methodism, etc.

I submit that if the WRO was as nonviable as is made out by some, its detractors wouldn't feel the reflexive need to douse any enthusiasm to it, lest it catch fire.

Btw, you keep speaking about a lack of saints in the West the last thousand years, as if the West hasn't had its practitioners of virtue. That is far from the Truth, along with the idea that the East has been a vice free zone.

Amin. And, God willing, through it some of those Lost Sheep might return...

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

As for 'rite calls to rite' - not really, as the Orthodox Western rite is not what they use in the Anglican or Roman Catholic churches. .

I presume that you are not very familiar with the rite used by the ROCA mission in the UK (and Australia.) The head of the UK mission hieromonk Michael from Australia certainly tries to sell it to the Anglicans as their very familiar worship.

"..."traditional Anglican" if you like - services that you, as a Church of England person would be very familiar with..."

Yes, absolutely familiar - as I was just there serving. Look further down the page. Though there is not 'the rite', there are 3, with a 4th possible. (Sarum, English, Mount Royal/Christminster - and Celtic.)

Which is probably why the main article on the page is: "WHY I ABANDONED PAPISM By Fr. Dcn Paul Ballester-Convolier" (later to be a Bishop and Martyred in 1984.) Followed by "A letter from an ex-Roman Catholic Priest to another on why he left Rome for Orthodoxy." - as you can see, both major Anglican concerns.

So, yes - we've answered the call for some Anglicans who want to know if WRITE Orthodoxy is possible. Roman Catholics and Evangelicals calling as well. No proselytism, just being available, answering their questions.

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

Btw, what is happening with ROCA's Western Rite mission in Australia? I know that Fr Barry Jeffrey's 9 member mission in Launceston has closed and of course Fr Michael is now resident in the UK He speaks of this on a webpage (he mentions that he visits Australia.) I do not think he has been there in the last year; who is now overseeing the WR mission in Australia and the Saint Petroc monastery or have they been abandoned?

_____________________ Fr Michael says: March 8, 2010 at 5:43 pm

Incidentally, my address line shows an Australian flag – presumably because my computer (which was given to me recently) has an Australian IP address – but I live in England (but visit Australia and the far east).

Ask ********. Things may be different than you suppose. In fact, I'm sure of that.

« Last Edit: November 30, 2010, 10:07:02 PM by arimethea »

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

The moderators are reviewing the Western Rite posts currently to avoid a repeat of the last dispute surrounding a person.

I would recommend that posters avoid trying to go down the route that was taken in that thread, and avoid discussing at length the details of persons who do not post on this forum.

I realize it is a fine line to post a legitimate criticism of someone's work and to post an assault on someone's person, but the moderators are trying to work that out right now and it would be nice if we could make their job easier by voluntarily restraining ourselves a bit.

Two WR people in Hobart write to me and they are tossing about trying to determine what future they now have with the prolonged absence of their priest-founder who has taken up residence in the UK. They were the people who told me that the Launceston mission is now closed. And one has written this week to say that last Sunday's worship in Hobart attracted 4 people out of their customary five members.

Two WR people in Hobart write to me and they are tossing about trying to determine what future they now have with the prolonged absence of their priest-founder who has taken up residence in the UK. They were the people who told me that the Launceston mission is now closed. And one has written this week to say that last Sunday's worship in Hobart attracted 4 people out of their customary five members.

Interesting - have you visited Tasmania then? Make plans on doing so? I didn't know you were involved in those missions in Tasmania.

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

Acknowledging Fr Anastasios' words, may we keep to the topic of the OP ~ "Western Rite ROCOR?"

Can anybody supply statistics for ROCA's Western Rite?

How many canonically established parishes in Australia, the UK and the United States?

How many parishioners?

Do we have reliable statistics on ROCOR as a whole? The unreliability of Orthodox statistics in the states has come up as of late.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

These figures were placed on a Western Rite e-list in October by a member of the Christminster community.

"I would guess from pretty accurate information and personal observationthat the ARWV has about 1,800 in 24 or so missions and parishes ofwhich on an average Sunday morning about 1000 actually show up. There isone parish that is over 300, one that is between 200 and 300 and a smallhandful a bit over 100. There are a number in the 30 to 60 categorythough. Some of the missions are very small so the average overall issmall.

"As to ROCOR the numbers are miniscule. The largest attendance atOur Lady of Glastonbury in Hamilton was a bit over 40 but a more typicalfigure would be a lot less.

"OLG is a revolving door of fairly frequent visitors (perhaps 50 who come from time to time over a year) but as it is essentially a large monastic chapel the core would be 4 monastics for the daily masses, a few more for Feast days and more yet on Sundays.

"There are also people who travel for Retreats and stay at the monastery.Women can stay at St. Benet House across the street which is anchored bySister Sophia. There is a small mission in Providence R.I that isattached to the monastery.

"I think Our Lady of Glastonbury is the only setting where there is a regular Sunday Mass in the ROCOR that is "public access".

I remember they just received 10 new parishes with 18 priests from the HOCACA earlier this month.

What does HOCACA mean?

Logged

There is no more evident sign that anyone is a saint and of the number of the elect, than to see him leading a good life and at the same time a prey to desolation, suffering, and trials. - Saint Aloysius Gonzaga